Government & Communications

One of President Donald Trump’s top advisers called on Congress to reauthorize authorities that gives intelligence agencies the ability to collect and analyze communications of foreigners outside the US Homeland Security Adviser Tom Bossert said Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act—set to expire in December—is the best means for intelligence agencies to monitor terrorist threats en masse given today’s internet-driven world.

“The terrorist threat isn’t going to sunset, so the authority shouldn’t either,” he said at the Intelligence and National Security Summit.The provision in the FISA amendment act dates back to 2008 and previously reauthorized in 2012. While the intelligence community including the National Security Agency and Central Intelligence Agency has advocated for its renewal, Section 702 has critics in Congress and among privacy advocates. Critics contend the authority allows intelligence agencies to scoop up emails, text messages and other communications of Americans who communicate with foreign targets or mention potential targets in conversations with non-targeted foreigners.

Artificial intelligence is giving rise to unprecedented capabilities for surveillance, from facial recognition at bridge crossings to the ability to identify thousands of people at once. Now, new research suggests that AI could potentially be used to identify people who have taken steps to conceal their identities by wearing hats, sunglasses, or scarves over their faces.

When the Obama administration was designing Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), privacy was a chief concern for immigration advocates, who worried about having undocumented immigrants identify themselves to the government. So US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) vowed it would wall off that data, protecting it from other agencies, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), that wanted to use it for deportation purposes. But because DACA was merely a policy, not a law, even the framers of this process knew full well that that promise to Dreamers was not binding. Even if the Dreamer data remains confidential, however, immigration advocates fear that ICE already has all the information it needs to target Dreamers where they work.

One reason many Dreamers applied for the program, after all, is to receive a work permit. Many employers use a system called e-verify to keep tabs on their employees’ immigration statuses. If President Donald Trump reverses DACA protections and stops renewing those permits, there’s not much stopping ICE from showing up at an employer's office the day after an employee's DACA permit expires.

A Q&A with media critic Douglas Rushkoff, a New York–based writer and professor at Queens College and author of "Throwing Rocks at the Google Bus: How Growth Became the Enemy of Prosperity."

Rushkoff said, "What we know for sure is that people around the world are becoming more conscious of the particular way that technology mega-corporations are working to change the legal and media landscape. Jeff Bezos buys the Washington Post so that his technology platform monolith has a voice. In Google, we have a situation where the world’s largest technology platform is also the world’s largest advertising platform. Things start to get messy. Google’s also the nation’s biggest lobbyist in DC. Does that mean Google is evil? Not necessarily. But their influence is very big. It wouldn’t be surprising to see organizations of all kinds accommodating the needs of one of these companies or another, whether it’s a publishing house accommodating Amazon books or New America accommodating Google’s lobbying arm."

[Commentary] As one of the few remaining members of the Kennedy administration who participated in the 1962 Cuban missile crisis, I was an eyewitness to the crucial role that telecommunications played in averting nuclear disaster.

As chairman of the Federal Communications Commission at that time, we created a “hotline” with the Soviet Union in the belief that improved communications would help avoid conflicts between nations in the nuclear era. Today, telecommunications have improved in ways we could not have imagined. They are faster, stronger, clearer, more accessible and higher resolution. News on television, radio and the internet is far more comprehensive, multisourced and instantaneous. Some of those new technologies have undermined the very tools President John F. Kennedy needed to avert war. President Kennedy once gave me a top-secret assignment. The Russians had jammed the Voice of America. My job was to enlist eight American commercial radio stations whose signals reached Cuba to carry key messages from Voice of America to the Cuban people. Before confiding in the stations, I asked each station owner to swear that they would not share the information with their news division until the embargo was lifted. Every one of them agreed and kept their word, ultimately playing a useful role in averting nuclear war. Would broadcasters today be willing to do the same?

[Chicago attorney Newton N. Minow was chairman of the Federal Communications Commission from 1961 to 1963]

(Aug 27)

The Federal Communications Commission’s public commenting process on network neutrality was such a debacle that the legitimacy of the entire body of comments is now in question. Many of the comments were filed with obviously bogus names.

Among the more visible cases of name theft: journalist and net neutrality advocate Karl Bode's identity was used without his consent for a comment favoring a roll back of the rules. FCC Chairman Ajit Pai's name was used on hundreds of comments opposing his proposal, some threatening him with death or using racial slurs. John Oliver's name was used on more than 2,000 of comments as well. On a case by case basis, these forgeries are easy enough to spot. But in aggregate, they're making it harder to draw conclusions about the overall public sentiment of the proceeding. In May 2017, the FCC's site was also hit with what appeared to be a spambot submitting hundreds of thousands of anti-Title II comments with the exact same boilerplate language. The broadband industry is now using the chaos of the comments process to claim that the public actually supports repealing Title II.

Former FCC special counsel Gigi Sohn said, "I can’t imagine there is nothing they can do, and I’d love to see a citation to anything that says that they cannot remove a comment that has been proven to be fake." If anything, she says, the agency might have an obligation under the Administrative Procedure Act to remove fake comments from its consideration. "At a bare minimum, they should investigate these comments and if they can’t actually remove the comments, they can and should disregard them as part of their consideration of record."

The special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, has obtained a letter that President Donald Trump and a top political aide drafted in the days before President Trump fired the FBI director, James B. Comey, which explains the president’s rationale for why he planned to dismiss the director. The May letter had been met with opposition from Donald F. McGahn II, the White House counsel, who believed that some of its contents were problematic, apparently.

McGahn successfully blocked the president from sending Comey the letter, which President Trump had composed with Stephen Miller, one of the president’s top political advisers. A different letter, written by the deputy attorney general, Rod J. Rosenstein, and focused on Comey’s handling of the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private e-mail server, was ultimately sent to the FBI director on the day he was fired.The contents of the original letter appear to provide the clearest rationale that President Trump had for firing Comey. The Times has not seen a copy of the letter and it is unclear how much of President Trump’s rationale focuses on the Russia investigation.

[Commentary] Since the Justice Department named a special investigator, Robert Mueller, to handle the government’s official inquiry into Russian meddling in the U.S. election, the weight of public expectation has largely fallen on his shoulders. While the two congressional panels, the Senate and House intelligence committees, continue to hold hearings and question witnesses, both are led by members of a party that is, with the exception of Charlottesville, skittish about criticizing the president. The two intelligence committees should act as if their investigations will be the final (and possibly the only) ones — because they may be.

A central role for Congress is the only real way to guarantee a full report, with conclusions and recommendations, for the American people. I oversaw a similarly complex and politically fraught inquiry as co-chairman of the joint congressional inquiry into 9/11, so I know what it takes — as a matter of resources, time, perseverance and, yes, occasional political courage — to run an investigation of this size and importance. And I know this, too: The congressional intelligence committees, as they are constituted today, are not ready for this burden.

[Bob Graham was a U.S. senator from Florida from 1987 to 2005. He served as chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence from 2001 to 2003 and as co-chairman of the Joint Inquiry Into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001.]

The online tumult of the 2016 election fed into a growing suspicion of Silicon Valley’s dominance over the public sphere. Across the political spectrum, people have become less trusting of the Big Tech companies that govern most online political expression. Calls for civic responsibility on the part of Silicon Valley companies have replaced the hope that technological innovation alone might bring about a democratic revolution. Despite the focus on algorithms, A.I., filter bubbles, and Big Data, these questions are political as much as technical.

Regulation has become an increasingly popular notion; the Sen Cory Booker (D-NJ) has called for greater antitrust scrutiny of Google and Facebook, while Stephen Bannon reportedly wants to regulate Google and Facebook like public utilities. In the nineteen-thirties, such threats encouraged commercial broadcasters to adopt the civic paradigm. In that prewar era, advocates of democratic radio were united by a progressive vision of pluralism and rationality; today, the question of how to fashion a democratic social media is one more front in our highly divisive culture wars.

President Donald Trump seized on a letter from two Republican senators claiming evidence that FBI Director James Comey cleared former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton of wrongdoing over her private e-mail server before concluding his investigation. In a message on Twitter, President Trump said it looked like Comey had "exonerated" Clinton, the 2016 Democratic nominee for president, before the investigation was over. “Wow, looks like James Comey exonerated Hillary Clinton long before the investigation was over...and so much more. A rigged system!” he tweeted.